Tribal Casino in OKC

[glennp]

Would you vote:

Yes
No
Undecided

This is if it was up to you...

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

No thanks.

All alliterations aside, keep those trashy and tacky temples of turpitude out in the sticks.

[FritterGirl]

No thanks.

All alliterations aside, keep those trashy and tacky temples of turpitude out in the sticks.

I couldn't have said it better myself. AMEN!!!

[bombermwc]

Depends. I don't think we know enough on the find pointed deatils yet. If I was to vote yes, then it would mean that every scrap of their project would have to be built and that they wouldn't be able to trim it down to a tent casino like we see elsewhere in OK. It needs to be a real structure with all the items they have discussed...not just a little casino. I'm not opposed to casinos, but I am opposed to crappy ones.

[jsenter]

Casinos are a regressive tax that take advantage of poor people hoping to strike it rich.

[CrimsonOberon]

Undecided.

On one hand, if it is indeed a resort, I could see it being a good tool to attract out-of-staters to OKC. A resort would be a great addition that would hopefully give new life to the Adventure District nearby.

On the other side, I don't particularly like what casinos represent, and I'm not sure it's the image I want to project for OKC. If it's successful, it won't be long before others are enticed to try building one to compete.

[BDP]

I would vote against a trashy temple of turpitude. However, I wouldn't mind a luxury resort that needed the gaming revenue to pay for the upscale amenities and entertainment. I think as it is now, unfortunately, that's the only way we'd get such an establishment in oklahoma city.

I'd love to see it be nice enough to be a destination to out of staters, but as long as the gaming rules are as they are, I doubt the draw would ever go above a half day's drive.

[bombermwc]

Casinos are a regressive tax that take advantage of poor people hoping to strike it rich.

I don't really buy that arguement. You might as well say cigarettes and alcohol have the same base. It's just not really valid.

You can't blame a casino because it's frequented by certain people. They choose to go there and gamble. And casinos don't live on those folks anyway. It's the high rollers that make them their money. These "poor" people are nickle and dime slot folks, not the multi-thousand dollar poker players that DO go to the places. We have high rollers in OK now already, so don't think they don't exist.

If you don't like the casino idea, fine, that's your opinion. But give a reason that doesn't involve a person's own personal decision to frequent that establishent. Otherwise by that logic, we should ban ALLLLLL kinds of things.

[Midtowner]

I would vote no because I think that if one group of people is allowed to have a casino, then the state should open up the gambling business to everyone.

I realize this isn't necessarily something the state or city has everything to do with, but if the indians are given their trust status, then the Adventure district as a whole should be opened up to other gambling operations (non-Indian) as competition will create a better product in the end.

[jsenter]

I don't really buy that arguement. You might as well say cigarettes and alcohol have the same base. It's just not really valid.

It's very valid. Taxes on alcohol and cigarettes are also regressive.

You can't blame a casino because it's frequented by certain people. They choose to go there and gamble. And casinos don't live on those folks anyway. It's the high rollers that make them their money. These "poor" people are nickle and dime slot folks, not the multi-thousand dollar poker players that DO go to the places. We have high rollers in OK now already, so don't think they don't exist.

You'd be surprised who the high rollers are. Spending your entire paycheck on gambling instead of on groceries for your family can make you a high roller. I've seen it more often than you'd imagine.

If you don't like the casino idea, fine, that's your opinion. But give a reason that doesn't involve a person's own personal decision to frequent that establishent. Otherwise by that logic, we should ban ALLLLLL kinds of things.

I think we should ban all sorts of things. It's all fraud, and it takes advantage of poor people. I put casinos up there with other types of fraud, that encourage the poor to give their money in hopes that they'll reap a big reward.

[jsenter]

I would vote no because I think that if one group of people is allowed to have a casino, then the state should open up the gambling business to everyone.

I realize this isn't necessarily something the state or city has everything to do with, but if the indians are given their trust status, then the Adventure district as a whole should be opened up to other gambling operations (non-Indian) as competition will create a better product in the end.

Native American tribes are doing this all over the state. Why is the Shawnee tribe any different, then say the Cherokee Tribe, who has a big casino resort up in Catoosa?

[Midtowner]

jsenter -- I understand.

Of course, this is different because we're talking about deeding land into trust which has no relation to the tribe's former range land or reservation. They'd have an unfair market advantage compared to say, the Absentee Shawnee Tribe.

That's why competition should be opened up to everyone. Level the playing field and you'll put a lot of folks out of business, but in the end, you'll be rewarded with absolutely top-notch facilities which will be real winners for the community. I really don't care about tribal welfare, but if we're going to have gaming, let's have the best damned gaming in the country.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

jsenter -- I understand.

Of course, this is different because we're talking about deeding land into trust which has no relation to the tribe's former range land or reservation. They'd have an unfair market advantage compared to say, the Absentee Shawnee Tribe.

That's why competition should be opened up to everyone. Level the playing field and you'll put a lot of folks out of business, but in the end, you'll be rewarded with absolutely top-notch facilities which will be real winners for the community. I really don't care about tribal welfare, but if we're going to have gaming, let's have the best damned gaming in the country.

Yer damned skippy. I'm not much of a gambler, but if we're going to do it, let's go all the way. Only letting Indians open, run, and profit from casinos is both short-sighted and unfair. Chalk it up to a sense of guilt on the white folk or a sense of entitlement on the part of Indians...or both...But at what point do the actions of people 100 years ago stop dictating the state's well being today?

I say open it up to anybody to build and run one...The revenues could pay for the Ford Center's replacement all by themselves.

That's my doubled down $0.02.

[Nixon7]

I don't know how any of the gambling laws work, but why is poker allowed and no sports books?

[Kerry]

We MUST save the poor from themselves at all cost. Fast food is regressive because the food cost the same no matter the income of the person buying it. Maybe McDonalds should have 2 value menus. People making under $25,000 should pay $1 for a McChicken while people above $25,000 should pay $2 for the same sandwich.

Crap, now that I think about it the entire capitalist system is regressive. Everything cost the same no matter what the persons income is. How can this be? Maybe we should run private interprise like the IRS. The more you earn the higher the price for everything. Of course, this might discourage people from taking risks and improving the economic status but that is OK.

Hey JSENTER - maybe it isn't up to you how people spend their money - even the poor people.

[Midtowner]

How about this proposition -- the poor people are only poor because they continue to allow themselves to be taken advantage of. If they're willing accomplices in their own demise, I have one word for you: Darwin.

[Karried]

All alliterations aside, keep those trashy and tacky temples of turpitude out in the sticks.

I'm heading to the sticks this week - Vegas that is... I can't help but think if we had anything similar nearby, I might be tempted to spend my money closer to home, but alas, off I go on Champion Air - that's close to $500 bucks we could have spent locally if we had something like Vegas to visit.

Actually, I can't gamble very long..I hate giving money away.. I go more for the shows, the entertainment, nightlife, people watching and best of all, the endless all you can eat buffets... j/k

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

I'm heading to the sticks this week - Vegas that is... I can't help but think if we had anything similar nearby, I might be tempted to spend my money closer to home, but alas, off I go on Champion Air - that's close to $500 bucks we could have spent locally if we had something like Vegas to visit.

Actually, I can't gamble very long..I hate giving money away.. I go more for the shows, the entertainment, nightlife, people watching and best of all, the endless all you can eat buffets... j/k

Well...I'm kinda torn on whether or not to have them close to town. I guess if they were really nice destination places...Sure. Put up a couple of nice ones down there by the river east of Bricktown or something. But in their current form...No thanks. Keep the glorified tents with attached Comfort Inns on the outskirts.

[bombermwc]

We MUST save the poor from themselves at all cost. Fast food is regressive because the food cost the same no matter the income of the person buying it. Maybe McDonalds should have 2 value menus. People making under $25,000 should pay $1 for a McChicken while people above $25,000 should pay $2 for the same sandwich.

Crap, now that I think about it the entire capitalist system is regressive. Everything cost the same no matter what the persons income is. How can this be? Maybe we should run private interprise like the IRS. The more you earn the higher the price for everything. Of course, this might discourage people from taking risks and improving the economic status but that is OK.

Hey JSENTER - maybe it isn't up to you how people spend their money - even the poor people.

A-Freakin-Men!

[mmonroe]

25000jobs.com

Did anyone else see this commercial?

[OU Adonis]

25000jobs.com

Did anyone else see this commercial?

Maybe we can build a horse track around the canal?

[mmonroe]

I don't think having an indian resort and casino would take away from the race track. Now if the casino was building a race track.. that would be different story. If the race track was really making that amount of money, than they wouldn't have the need to argue about the casino aspect. Remington was on it's way out before SQ721 changed that and they were allowed to put a casino in to eleviate the amount of money they were losing. It's just a big BOO HOO and I think 25,000 jobs is a bit overly stated. Not to mention, the Fair Grounds are picking up where Remington has left off... not much they can do to try and stop Tim O'toole from doing what he does over at the State Fair, so they attack the Shawnee Tribe. [I know i'm going to get it from at least one person, the relative location and distance from one another. Go ahead, give me that argument.] If this resort attracts more tourist dollars, because the last time I checked, Remington wasn't doing it, then i'm for it. If the resort brings in 100 more jobs than what Remington has employed, i'm for it. So BOO HOO 25000jobs.com BOO HOO

[OKCMallen]

The one in the middle of Tulsa on Riverside is nice, safe, not an eyesore, and seems to do quite fine. Riverwind is almost in Norman, and is fine. I don't see the problem. All it would do is ATTRACT DOLLARS from out of OKC.

[mmonroe]

Tourist come in, they troll around OKC, spend their monies.. I don't see a problem with it. More revenue for the city.

[OKCMallen]

I agree monroe...these people are dirving from out of state into Tulsa. They'd come to OKC too.